Will it continue

delete5230

Many variables, to name a few: 
-Legal issues, it runs the possibility not much was documented, thereby not much was owned by Brad.  Visionary Realms maybe financially sheared.
Often for tax reasons, fundings are kept in an open account for several to access.
-Did a transfer of ownership take place beforehand.
-Charitable contributions, the laws are different.
-Leftover funding, and future deals. 
-Willingness to continue, and over all hype for a good stable future.  

And as someone else had mentioned, start over in memory of Brad. 



Two short stories:
In my area we have a very wealthy entrepreneur.  Word has it he owns half the city and county, YET HIS NAME IS NOT ON ANYTHING.
 

I have a personal friend that started a construction company.  As it grew larger he was advised to take his name off everything. On paper he owned nothing.  Infact he was driving a large dual axle pickup truck.  If you asked him it was the companies, I could never get him to admit it was his.  He was only an employee.


My opinion:
Brad was a genius with a vision.  Others are better at programming decisions. Brad brought them all together. I believe there was a lot of intimacy involved....... As long as the legal issues are manageable, I think will have a game. 

Scot

Calm down and carry on gaming. I don't think the issues you raise should cause such concern. The game will launch, but we should all know by now that anything that is a KS has a development time that telescopes even more than a game from an established gaming company.

goldwheat

Multiple employees of Visionary Realms have confirmed, in the past 48 hours on the official forums, that development of Pantheon will continue.

Geeky

Are there no verification processes on this site to stop spammers from gaining access to the forums?  This thread has 4 posts and 2 of them are spam.  Come on MMORPG.com do better.

Vrika

goldwheat said:

Multiple employees of Visionary Realms have confirmed, in the past 48 hours on the official forums, that development of Pantheon will continue.

At the moment we should be waiting for info on who's the owner and his statement about the future of the project. It's not the employees decision, they will continue as long as they're getting paid, it's decision of the company owner.

Of course making any kind of decision will take some time.

gervaise1

Going into work today the devs will have known what they were going to do. And the money will be in place to support that.

The short - and even medium- term will be mapped out in reasonable detail. Indeed if Pantheon was "close" to release this type of question wouldn't even be raised. 

It isn't though. So new "detailed" plans will still be needed, fleshing out the vision; funding will run out if not replenished. And the question becomes: what was Brad's part in these areas.

As @DMKano says: many games die in development.

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

Mendel

DMKano said:

Vrika said:

goldwheat said:

Multiple employees of Visionary Realms have confirmed, in the past 48 hours on the official forums, that development of Pantheon will continue.

At the moment we should be waiting for info on who's the owner and his statement about the future of the project. It's not the employees decision, they will continue as long as they're getting paid, it's decision of the company owner.

Of course making any kind of decision will take some time.

I can tell you 100% that they will continue working on it.

The big question is - will they finish the game as originally envisioned - and this is always the biggest question for any game in development regardless of circumstances.

Many games die in development

Finish, yes.  As originally envisioned, that's where it becomes problematic.

Pantheon seems to have been Brad's vision.  He has had a guiding hand on its development from the start.  We will see now if everyone at VR shared that same vision.  I'm guessing their might be some internal struggle as another voice-of-Pantheon emerges.  Chances are very good that we may never see any sign of this.

I have been critical of Brad for not attempting a bit more with Pantheon.  It has always seemed that Brad was making a game that he knew how to make, with very little variation and mostly minor changes to the formula.  Now, my preliminary stance is that the few innovations that Pantheon promised are in definite trouble.  It may be that new systems, like the Environment and Perception mechanics, may be left out of the final project.

Right now, it appears to me that this game will release as far closer to the EQ1-with-better-graphics that has been the cry of the EverQuest fan from pretty early.  That will please many.  Not me, however.  MMORPGs are expensive to make and require a great convergence of talent.  A new game that doesn't push the boundaries of what we expect an MMORPG to be is a wasted opportunity to me.  It doesn't grow the genre.

New development is at an anemic pace.  Big developers have left the genre to underfunded indies, and passion projects.  The indies are too constrained by budgetary issues, while the passion projects have troubles simply implementing their wilder ideas.  It is unlikely for either of these camps to truly innovate.  VR has seemed at times to be both, Brad's passion project constrained by an indie budget.

Will that passion project survive the cut-all-corners attitude imposed by most indie budgets?  That will be interesting to watch in the upcoming months.  We might get a renewed effort to build Brad's dream, or we might get a rushed Pantheon-lite version sooner than we currently expect.  Interesting dilemma.

Amathe

I guess I process this kind of thing slower than some. I'm still in denial that Brad has passed. It's too early for me to speculate on the future of Pantheon.

centkin

I think the same thing will happen as what happened with Vanguard when Microsoft came in.

1) It will release faster without him than with him (which is not a good thing).

2) Difficult to implement features will be trimmed or scaled down. 

3) The game will be flanderized into the mainstream with the sharp edges shaved down.

4) It will release faster without him than with him but it won't be the same game envisioned by him(repeated for emphasis.)

Tiller

Mark my words, John Smedley will start a new company, then buy the game.

goldwheat

Once a project achieves enough milestones, no single person should determine success or failure.

If they deliver what is promised in these three pages, they will have accomplished their goal.  Many of their public design decisions since 2014 have been in direct opposition to what is stated on those pages, though, so that's a outstanding and ongoing issue. 
There definitely seems to have been some friction, historically, between the phases of: idea versus implementation, up to Nov 18th, 2019:

" Hey everyone,

As most of you know there has been quite a flurry of posts by Brad over the past few days. While new communications are definitely exciting, anytime there is a dense amount of thoughts/ideas/information exchanged very quickly it can lead to confusion and misperception, especially in a written context where clarifying back-and-forth is difficult. So with that in mind, I want to highlight a few things for context:

1. Brad's blogs and forum posts consist largely of Brad's ideas and opinions. Unless officially stated, they should not reflect definitive decisions or directions. The same applies to me and anyone else speaking on behalf of Pantheon - unless it is clearly stated to be an official stance or direction, it should be received as an idea pending team discussion, vetting, approvals, etc.

2. With that context in mind, I'll give you all an example. Brad's ideas on Advanced Threat Assessment, mob-locking and instancing are not ideas I fundamentally agree with. I certainly believe they have merit and are worth consideration, but I don't personally believe they are the best solutions for the issues they seek to address. I have a different approach to handling contested content within an open world game like this that does not involve mob locking that I feel strongly we need to explore. Plus, you as the community are full of amazing ideas on this topic as well which we absolutely glean from. But that is the key, exploring the merit and edge-cases of an idea/direction thoroughly before crystallizing it as a final approach. This kind of "creative tension" is a good thing and healthy for the overall design of the game. When we have more definitive, official decisions to share with you all on how we will be handling these issues, you'll be sure to know. "

Now, after Nov 19th, 2019, it will be interesting to see how Joppa and the team proceeds.

svann

Id think the game will hurt for lack of his input, but legally there isnt going to be any problem.

Sovrath

Arterius said:

With him gone will the game and transform into something we don't want. 

Or maybe it will be closer to what "we" (that's a big meatball right there) want.

Remember, Brad was adding a type of instancing in the dungeons and there were people (is that "we?") who didn't want that.

Maybe the people working on it will bring it closer to the original idea of an Everquest successor.

Mendel

Arterius said:

I'll repost here because I think it makes more sense here....

I know most would disagree with me I am sure and I may seem like a bad guy for saying this but after giving it some thought I don't know if I want development of Pantheon to continue. This comes from someone who has 1k riding on the game as well. The reason is simple. Pantheon was years out. I would guess 2023. Maybe 2022. If not further. The game is still in PA and from what we have seen from various newsletters and streams we know the game was very much a work in progress.

No doubt the team had a shared vision. I also understand Brad wasn't only making this game with his input in mind but I have to believe that Brad was a huge driving force. With him gone will the game and transform into something we don't want. I am not saying that they are going to do a complete 180 and make it like a BDO or anything but it could change in a way that backers and fans are not 100% happy with.

I myself would not be disappointed if VR said they were not continuing with Pantheon but instead were hoping to make another game in his honor or just gave up the ghost altogether. I don't even think backers could really get that upset. Its not like the game was cancelled because they ran out of money or some other crazy reason. Brad has sadly passed away.

Don't get me wrong I won't be sad if they continue work on Pantheon and I will keep an eye on it closely because of the money I have put into it. I just worry that a void is now gone that can't be filled. I also hope that the team is ready for some big shoes to fill if they continue to work on the game as well because now more then ever they will be counting someones legacy and with that comes some big shoes.

I mean can you imagine if this game in a year does not look like what backers or fans expected. Even if that something was what Brad pushed for it won't matter. People will look at it as tarnishing his memory and the last game Brad worked on. I don't not envy the team at VR in the slightest. I would both be extremely sad for losing and friend and scared of what comes next.

Good points, @Arterius.

I'd like to believe that the VR team shared a "single vision", but really fear that this was more a matter of Brad controlling the ideas and dominating their internal conversations.  After all, he was a name in the industry.  I've working in many situations in different companies where the dominant personality drove all the creative ideas, while the marketing types spouted all sorts of nonsense about a "unified effort", "clear vision" and the like.

VR has done a pretty good job of keeping any/all internal differences out of the public eye.  If there is any infighting post-Brad, I expect they will do equally well at keeping that out of circulation.  I do not believe under any circumstances that there won't be some differences as to the direction.  It's just a matter of how this affects the development.

I agree with your assessment, 2023 seems a likely target date.  It will depend on how much content they plan to develop using the Faerthale model they are currently developing *and* how quickly they fall in-line behind a single leader.

Vrika

Arterius said:

I myself would not be disappointed if VR said they were not continuing with Pantheon but instead were hoping to make another game in his honor or just gave up the ghost altogether. I don't even think backers could really get that upset. Its not like the game was cancelled because they ran out of money or some other crazy reason. Brad has sadly passed away.

Even if you wouldn't be disappointed, there would likely be enough disappointed players that they'd shut the company down rather than use it to develop another game. If the company has enough money to develop another game both the company and its owners would get sued for abandoning Pantheon's development unless they also provide refunds.

I believe that Pantheon's development will go on, but if it were to stop they'd shut down the company rather than use it for any other projects.

delete5230

svann said:

Id think the game will hurt for lack of his input, but legally there isnt going to be any problem.

svann said:

Id think the game will hurt for lack of his input, but legally there isnt going to be any problem.

I don't think the game will lack input..... I'm willing to bet everyone on his team was well versed on "the Vision", infact it most likely part of the interview process.  If you seemed to not like "the Vision" you were out. 

I would think Brad was stubborn as a mull in what he wanted..... Will they change the vision?....No but soften it substantially. 

I also don't think they will have any problems legally.

delete5230

Sovrath said:

Arterius said:

With him gone will the game and transform into something we don't want. 

Or maybe it will be closer to what "we" (that's a big meatball right there) want.

Remember, Brad was adding a type of instancing in the dungeons and there were people (is that "we?") who didn't want that.

Maybe the people working on it will bring it closer to the original idea of an Everquest successor.

Love this.... I hope they drop the instancing.


I want Everquest, Project 1999 sucked from old outdated UI..... Other than nostalgia, I can imagine how anyone new could stay. 

Give us a world where we can do what ever we want !

Gutlard

If you build it he will come.

Gut Out!

Utinni

delete5230 said:

Sovrath said:

Arterius said:

With him gone will the game and transform into something we don't want. 

Or maybe it will be closer to what "we" (that's a big meatball right there) want.

Remember, Brad was adding a type of instancing in the dungeons and there were people (is that "we?") who didn't want that.

Maybe the people working on it will bring it closer to the original idea of an Everquest successor.

Love this.... I hope they drop the instancing.


I want Everquest, Project 1999 sucked from old outdated UI..... Other than nostalgia, I can imagine how anyone new could stay. 

Give us a world where we can do what ever we want !

Removing instancing will give you what P99 has. Everquest with only open world raids/dungeons is the most toxic game I've ever played.

Kyleran

Utinni said:

delete5230 said:

Sovrath said:

Arterius said:

With him gone will the game and transform into something we don't want. 

Or maybe it will be closer to what "we" (that's a big meatball right there) want.

Remember, Brad was adding a type of instancing in the dungeons and there were people (is that "we?") who didn't want that.

Maybe the people working on it will bring it closer to the original idea of an Everquest successor.

Love this.... I hope they drop the instancing.


I want Everquest, Project 1999 sucked from old outdated UI..... Other than nostalgia, I can imagine how anyone new could stay. 

Give us a world where we can do what ever we want !

Removing instancing will give you what P99 has. Everquest with only open world raids/dungeons is the most toxic game I've ever played.

Unfortunately he never really played EQ1 so he doesn't realize the "freedom" was largely an illusion and the game had it's own form of rails which players generally had to follow 

TEKK3N

centkin said:

I think the same thing will happen as what happened with Vanguard when Microsoft came in.

1) It will release faster without him than with him (which is not a good thing).

2) Difficult to implement features will be trimmed or scaled down. 

3) The game will be flanderized into the mainstream with the sharp edges shaved down.

4) It will release faster without him than with him but it won't be the same game envisioned by him(repeated for emphasis.)

Ok few misconceptions I want to correct:

1) Microsoft didn't come in at a later stage, It was  there from the First day as Sigil Games was funded by Microsoft Which wanted to enter the MMORPG market.

2) At some point Microsoft quit and Sigil was left with no funding with the game still Years from release.

Brad had to sell the game to SOE for the simbolic sum of 1 Dollar, to avoid shutting the game.

3) SOE Launched the game early and Brad had absolutely nothing to do with It as he was relegated as simple game advisor.

The big difference Is that today Pantheon doesn't rely on other publisher Money.

Financially Brad departure won't change anything, in that respect.

What we don't know Is their real financial situation, It could be that they have some issues, but Brad departure in not going to influence their financial situation.

Hawkaya399

Brad's not dead you silly. His spirit lives on in all of us that share his likeness. Remember, people are more alike than unlike.

Everques didn't cause all of us to suddenly like thyings we never liked before. We already liked Everquest before we knew about it. Saga of Lucimia is alive because we all share a similar spark. Pantheon is same.

Some people's spark is similar but not as much. They used Everquest as inspiration but moved well beyond it. You hear about them everyday on game sites. "Everquest was great in its time, but so much has changed since then." Their glow now carries them to new horizons.

We should learn to celebrate difference not be bitter about it. Happiness is inversely proportional to expectations.

Hawkaya399

Kyleran said:

Utinni said:

delete5230 said:

Sovrath said:

Arterius said:

With him gone will the game and transform into something we don't want. 

Or maybe it will be closer to what "we" (that's a big meatball right there) want.

Remember, Brad was adding a type of instancing in the dungeons and there were people (is that "we?") who didn't want that.

Maybe the people working on it will bring it closer to the original idea of an Everquest successor.

Love this.... I hope they drop the instancing.


I want Everquest, Project 1999 sucked from old outdated UI..... Other than nostalgia, I can imagine how anyone new could stay. 

Give us a world where we can do what ever we want !

Removing instancing will give you what P99 has. Everquest with only open world raids/dungeons is the most toxic game I've ever played.

Unfortunately he never really played EQ1 so he doesn't realize the "freedom" was largely an illusion and the game had it's own form of rails which players generally had to follow 

That's not relaly true. I played EQ1 a lot. Heck I still do. I hate instancing to this day. I think we're all just different and expeirenced it differently. Give one person a flavor and thye like it, give it t oanother and they don't. That's life.

Instancing removes the sandbox in social. For some people the sandbox is toxic. For others it's spontaneous and magical.

I will admit there was content congestion, especially in the high level areas because there weren't as many options. This squeezed a lot of players into only a couple places, meaning some players would have nothing to do except: a) get on a waiting list for a group b) go to lower level places c) do something else (like crafting). This is however not a problem of non-instanced, but a problem of content and population. I believe instancing is the easiest, cheapest answer to content congestion, but it's not the only and single answer. This is where my disagreement mostly resides, although I still believe the social sandbox is hurt with instancing.

Btw, I feel the same way about chat and even griefers in PvP open world. I don't like to restrict things.  I guess my definition of "toxic" is mroe lenient than msot, or maybe I"m toxic and just get along with toxic players better.

delete5230

Hawkaya399 said:

Kyleran said:

Utinni said:

delete5230 said:

Sovrath said:

Arterius said:

With him gone will the game and transform into something we don't want. 

Or maybe it will be closer to what "we" (that's a big meatball right there) want.

Remember, Brad was adding a type of instancing in the dungeons and there were people (is that "we?") who didn't want that.

Maybe the people working on it will bring it closer to the original idea of an Everquest successor.

Love this.... I hope they drop the instancing.


I want Everquest, Project 1999 sucked from old outdated UI..... Other than nostalgia, I can imagine how anyone new could stay. 

Give us a world where we can do what ever we want !

Removing instancing will give you what P99 has. Everquest with only open world raids/dungeons is the most toxic game I've ever played.

Unfortunately he never really played EQ1 so he doesn't realize the "freedom" was largely an illusion and the game had it's own form of rails which players generally had to follow 

That's not relaly true. I played EQ1 a lot. Heck I still do. I hate instancing to this day. I think we're all just different and expeirenced it differently. Give one person a flavor and thye like it, give it t oanother and they don't. That's life.

Instancing puts the sandbox in social.

I do have to say in Vanguard dungeons could be hectic and spoil your groups plans. 

But to make venturing around in a group being instance would really suck. It could even change my willingness to play this game that I want so badly. 

I want a modern EQ1

Hawkaya399

delete5230 said:

Hawkaya399 said:

That's not relaly true. I played EQ1 a lot. Heck I still do. I hate instancing to this day. I think we're all just different and expeirenced it differently. Give one person a flavor and thye like it, give it t oanother and they don't. That's life.

Instancing puts the sandbox in social.

I do have to say in Vanguard dungeons could be hectic and spoil your groups plans. 

But to make venturing around in a group being instance would really suck. It could even change my willingness to play this game that I want so badly. 

I want a modern EQ1

I hope you know I meant to say Instancing removes the sandbox in social.

I added more changes to my post. I comment about content congestion--which was a real problem in EQ1. Thinking back, I can rmember blackburrow being full so me and my friend went to qeynos catacombs and killed smugglers (this was back in early 1999). I also remember being on a waiting list because I didn't wnat to run halfway across the world to see if another place had room. So I feel instancing is easy and cheap, but it's not the only answer. In fact, at least in my case, being I like sandboxes in general, instancing is the worst. I LOVE bumping into people. And the fact there're some "toxic" people is something I've always been able to tolerate. I'd much rather have the toxic if it means I can keep the magic of spontaneous meetings.

Remember I played through LDONs too. I know what instances are. I've played many MMORPGs. I just know I don't like them. And it's not like I've not played any non-instanced worlds and I"m just wearing rose tinted glasses. NO. I've went back to non-instnaced games and discover I still hate instancing, not the reverse. There're no rose tinted glasses. Where're those anyway, I'm always toled they exist somewhere but I never find them. What I see is through my own eyes.

And I'll add one more thing. I remember in Diablo 2 when more players came to a server the difficulty and reward of killing monsters went up. It didn't create instances when they came. (And yes I realize it instanced the 6 person world, but within that context of the 6 person world, it did NOT instance.) This is just one tiny example, and not the best one, but content congestion can be addressed in many ways. It just so happens instances are probably the easiest and this is why so many MMORPGs went that direction. It's also possible instances are the friendliest for solo players and in general mimic single player expeirences, and lots of players like it that way.